It's not simple though. In that 140ms the network is checking fraud rules, validating the card, checking available credit, applying rewards logic, and routing across multiple parties. The actual subtract-one-number-from-another takes microseconds. The rest is trust verification across organizational boundaries — which is the hard part of any payment system.
At best it’s checking available credit. All the other stuff is done after the fact. The idea that any banking transaction involves “subtracting one number from another” is so wrong it’s barely worth engaging with.
I assume you're being cynical, but there's a lot of truth in what you say: LLMs allow me to build software to fit my architecture and business needs, even if it's not a language I'm familiar with.
I think that’s possible too but the trouble is training them. LLMs are built on decades of human input. A new framework, programming language, database, etc doesn’t have that.
If it knows the language already a new framework is a piece of cake. A few MD files explaining it is enough for the pattern recognition to kick in. I've had one LLM create a novel framework and pass them to another and it's trivial for a fresh instance to pick it up.
With the complexity of modern pipelines, there are very few humans that can beat a good optimizing compiler. Considering that with an LLM you're also bloating limited context with unsemantic instructions I can't see how this is anything but an exercise in failure.
Man, if this were true we’d see a crazy, massive explosion of quality products being written, and launched. While we see some use, i don’t perceive an acceleration. In fact, i see a lot of trivial bugs being deployed to prod.
I guess that what people debate on here is what “decent” mean. From my experience, these llms spit out dog shit code, so 20 agents equal 20x more dog shit.
We’re building Chaotic, a high-performance 3D game engine and editor written in Rust. It targets WebAssembly and WebGL2, making it possible to deliver near-native performance and console-quality visuals directly in the browser. On top of the engine, we’re currently developing a multiplayer cozy farming game inspired by Animal Crossing called Fireflies Meadow: https://firefliesmeadow.com/?admin=SkipTheLine&skip=IKnowWha...
Fireflies Meadow isn’t ready for prime time yet, but we’re proud of the progress so far and actively iterating on it.
If you’re interested in the engine, the game, or just want to follow along, feel free to reach out on our Discord: https://discord.com/invite/mHsQayQNdp
I’d be curious to hear your feedback on whether the game is working for you or not.
Money must flow from a source to potentially multiple destination. Because of that previous fact, you must have at least two postings per transaction (the double in double entry). If you manage to move money correctly without any errors, those postings in that transaction will add up to zero, making it trivial to verify you've done everything correctly without any errors.
> can't two errors cancel each other out and you still wind up at zero?
They can, but the probability of two opposite errors of exactly the same magnitude is much lower than of any individual random error.
It's the same as with any other error-correction encoding. You don't have a guarantee that all errors will be caught by it, but most of them can be, so it's useful overall.
reply